The instruction manual tells us that a build up of static electricity is the cause, but removing and replacing the battery will reset things again. If it does, then "no repair is necessary".

I mention this because today in Manchester almost every metal rail that I touched gave me a shock and I just wondered if there's a build up of static at the moment. Weather? Imminent invasion by Daleks?

The serious question is, have the places where this has happened been likely to have any static around? It seems the effect can happen but it has really been very rare until this spate of reports. What's the common denominator?

Please do not quote spam....it propagates the spam further and increases the number of posts to be removed.

Sensibilities were different in the 1970s when DH was a highly regarded photographer, albeit it in the "soft porn" area of the market. Ethereal soft focus was his technique and I believe he used a really rubbish 50mm lens. made a fortune with it.

It just shows that sharpness isn't everything.

It's an interesting question, and one that I found quite difficult to find an answer to. Part of the problem is that I don't really want to have taken somebody else's photo - I want to take mine. Photography is about expressing something of oneself.

However, I think the answer is I would like to have produced a shot like Ansel Adams's image of Mount Williamson. The powerful rocks in the foreground, the majestic mountains and the dark, foreboding sky....superb.

It's the rendering Andrew. Soft focus lenses leave some aberrations uncorrected, so it creates a particular effect. Soft lenses are just unsharp and soft, however, they are so because of lens defects, so it's possible to get a really poor lens that actually gives you the results you want. See David Hamilton's work for a good example of this. Probably not PC these days, so Adults Only for David Hamilton.

The poor lens route will be unpredictable, the soft focus lens will be a predictable effect.

I've used the 85mm f/2.2, but I was uninspired by its possibilities. The lenses are quite rare and very expensive as a result. In the version I had there was an adjustable baffle that increased the soft focus effect.

I'd rather have a standard 85mm and use a soft focus filter or digital effect than the specialised lens. Using the soft focus lens we still only have a two element in one group lens, not highly corrected by a long way.

The synch speed of the MX is 1/60sec, so no faster than that. Just use a cable with a standard flash connection and attach it to the X socket of the camera.

Alternatively, with studio flash an IR or radio trigger could be used. It just fits into the camera hotshoe.

The K-01 uses K mount lenses as standard, which is its advantage. The only thing missing compared to a DSLR is the pentaprism finder. It's not a miniature camera in any respect, but it has its place and I would find one quite useful.

The Q is a miniature and its own lenses are rather good. The adapters do increase the potential and offer all sorts of ideas for experimentation, but essentially it's a very versatile and very tiny system camera.

The Pentax Q adapter controls the aperture and has a built in shutter, important for moving subjects. Having said that, I bought a Chinese one for £46 and it works very well, but isn't as sophisticated. I wanted to see if it was worth buying a full priced adapter by trying out some lenses first.

My conclusion is it could be, depending on how much it was going to be used and for what purpose. I won't be at the moment, but might later. Other priorities just now.

Post deleted - please don't re-quote spam, it just adds to the number of posts that need deleting.